-3Sub:- Running of Technology Express Exhibition train.

IIT/Kharagpur has requested to run Technology Express Exhibition train with composition of 5 Shatabdi type ACC Car coaches, One AC 3 Tier(Rajdhani type), one power car and one SLR for a period of three months. It will cover 46 stations. They have requested to waive the charges or levy token charges (Less than 10%) for running the train. Board (MT/CRB) has granted in principle approval for running the above mentioned train. While seeking approval, it had been stated that IIT/Kharagpur is committed to all financial obligations in this regard (SN/3). Accordingly, approximate charges on FTR basis worked out at Rs.3.5 Crores(SN/11) may be levied from IIT/Kharagpur. Submitted for consideration please. DD/F(C) DF(C) EDF(C) Adv./F MT FC CRB MSR(MR)

-2Reference pre-page Under consideration is the proposal to levy a surcharge of 10% on basic fare in all classes in case of special trains summer/winter/festive season and short notice special train. SR (SN/2) and NR (SN/1) have suggested that fares for special trains may be increased as there remains very high demand during these periods. Vide SN/2 in his letter, FA&CAO/SR has mentioned that the special traffic costing studies conducted on that Railway for the special trains have revealed that the trains are making a loss of 62.79% on terminal and line haul cost at the current level of fares and costs. To make them economically viable, a few measures were suggested in the aforesaid letter. After consideration of proposal of both the Railways, TC Dte. has proposed that a surcharge of 10% on basic fare in all classes in special trains may be levied. It has been mentioned that the suggestion of NR and SR for 50% - 100% increase in the fares may not be feasible since this will make the fares of special trains much higher than the fares of normal mail/exp trains. Comparative statement of class wise passenger fares of mail express with proposed special trains fares and Duronto/Rajdhani fares is placed at SN/3. Vide NP/2, information regarding no. of special trains run during 2010, occupancy and earnings thereof was called for from the concerned Dte. Partial information has been furnished and placed vide F/A without any analysis in support of their proposal or otherwise. Veracity of data is also questionable as no. of passengers travelled have been shown zero vide Sl No. 228 and 242 of the statement (F/A). Perusal of the report reveals that a number of special trains have run below their potential (downward arrow in pencil marked against each) which do not justify levying a surcharge of 10% on basic fare. Therefore, it is felt that Commercial Dte. may contemplate some other measures to address the issue. Submitted for consideration please. DDF(C) DF(C) EDF(C) EDPM

-35Under consideration is the proposal to grant special dispensation for charging fares via original route till such time normalcy in train running is restored. South Eastern Railway has mentioned in their letter at SN/63 that due to accident of Jananeshwari Super Deluxe 12102 on 28.05.2010, some restrictions/diversions for running of trains in KGP TATA ROU and KGP ADRA sections have been imposed. It has also been mentioned that some trains have been rescheduled/regulated to avoid night running keeping in view of law and order situation. Regarding the diverted trains, SER has given some suggestions which have been detailed in para 3 at NP/33. As per para 3(iv), SER has requested to grant special permission for charging fare/freight via original route even for those trains which are running via alternative longer route with retrospective effect till such time normalcy in trains running is restored. Passenger Marketing Dte has mentioned that keeping in view, the convenience of passengers, special dispensations have been given on a number of occasions in the past for charging fares via original normal route (NP/29 & SN/58). In view of this, special dispensation for charging the fares by the original routes as proposed may be agreed to. Submitted for approval please. DDF(C) DF(C) EDF(C) AM(C)

-2Reference pre-page On the suggestion of NR(SN/1) and SR(SN/2), Comml Dte has proposed to levy a surcharge of 10% on basic fare in all classes in case of special trains Summer/Winter/Festival season & short notice special trains. For better appreciation of the proposal, information regarding number of special trains run during 2010-11(FY) (all three types mentioned under para 1 at pre-page) and occupancy thereof may be furnished.

DDF(C) DF(C) EDF(C) EDPM

-2Reference pre-page Under consideration is the proposal to levy a surcharge of 10% on basic fare in all classes in case of special trains summer/winter/festive season and short notice special train. SR (SN/2) and NR (SN/1) have suggested that fares for special trains may be increased as there remains very high demand during these periods. Vide SN/2 in his letter, FA&CAO/SR has mentioned that the special traffic costing studies conducted on that Railway for the special trains have revealed that the trains are making a loss of 62.79% on terminal and line haul cost at the current level of fares and costs. To make them economically viable, a few measures were suggested in the aforesaid letter. After consideration of proposal of both the Railways, TC Dte. has proposed that a surcharge of 10% on basic fare in all classes in special trains may be levied. It has been mentioned that the suggestion of NR and SR for 50% - 100% increase in the fares may not be feasible since this will make the fares of special trains much higher than the fares of normal mail/exp trains. Comparative statement of class wise passenger fares of mail express with proposed special trains fares and Duronto/Rajdhani fares is placed at SN/3. Vide NP/2, information regarding no. of special trains run during 2010, occupancy and earnings thereof was called for from the concerned Dte. On perusal of the information at F/A, it is seen that a number of special trains have run below their potential. In trains where occupancy was abysmal, the trains might have been cancelled. Under the circumstances, it is not justifiable to levy a surcharge of 50-100% on basic fare as proposed by Zonal Railways. While surcharge of 10% on basic fare in all classes is agreed to, Commercial Dte. may also contemplate some other measures to address the issue. Submitted for consideration please.

DDF(C) DF(C) EDF(C) EDPM

-41The issue under consideration is regarding replacing the system of levy of haulage charges and hire charges for utilization of brake van by levying one charge, namely, hire charges for Railway brake van. The extant instructions stipulated vide RC 22 of 2010(S.No.17) are as under:Haulage charges for Brake van is levied at the prevailing rate of Haulage of TEU ( upto 20 MT) + 10%.
(i)

(ii) In addition to Haulage charge, hire charge for utilization of Railway brake van is recovered at the prevailing rate of Hire charges for 4-wheeler BG wagon for non rail users @ Rs.424/-per wagon per day. Vide NP/29-33, TCR Dte in their earlier proposal had mentioned that as per cost sheet (SN/22) taking the cost of brake van as 30 lakh and codal life as 20 years, the recoverable cost for brake van comes out to Rs.3.25 lakh per year and in terms of per day it is Rs.863/-. Accordingly, it was proposed to fix hire charges at Rs.870/- per brake van per day. At present the rate of hire charges is Rs.424/- for four wheeler wagon per day (SN/16). Finance vide NP/34-35 observed that hire charges of Rs.870/- only per brake van per day does not appear to be sufficient and it would be appropriate to levy hire charges @ Rs.870/- per day in addition to haulage charges to motivate CTOs to procure their own brake vans. While approving extension of extant instructions for one month upto 31.07.2011, the then MT minuted vide NP/36 that file may be put up to his successor for further decision. Now, vide NP/38-40 in their modified proposal, TCR has proposed to fix the rate of hire charges for Railway brake van @ Rs.1500/- per brake van per day based on worksheet (SN/29) taking the codal life as 8 years and rounding it off to next 100, i.e. 1500/- per day (Rs.1418). The issues raised by TCR Dte have been examined and the observations are as under: (1) The justification for the proposal has been attributed to provisions of MCA. Para 5.1 of MCA stipulates that till such time the concessionaire procures the required brake vans, the Railway administration may provide its own brake vans (provided available) on non-discriminatory basis at a reasonable charge. This reasonable charge should not be construed to be a token charge for Railway resulting in losses. (2) The proposed hire charges i.e. Rs. 1500/- per day per brake van is much lower than the existing charges i.e. hire cum haulage charges. (3) It is not understood why codal life has been taken as 8 years for the

-42proposed hire charges when the actual codal life is 35 years (SN-22). It is presumed that the same has been done to work out a reasonable charge. While sending the proposal earlier, the codal life had been taken as 20 years( NP-30). Even after taking the codal life of 8 years, the hire charges work out to Rs. 1500/- per brake van per day(NP-40) as against the existing charges (i.e. haulage + hire charges) which work out to Rs. 2840/- per day per brake van (SN-31). The existing charges have been calculated based on the data furnished by TCR Dte on date. (4) The primary purpose of specifying this charge was to ensure that in keeping with the policy CTOs procure one brake van along with each of their container train so that the same could remain attached with the train on a permanent basis. However, most of the CTOs have not even placed an order for procuring brake vans even after 5 years which implies that they intend to use Railway Brake Vans on a permanent basis and thus saving their own investment. While One hundred twenty two (122) rakes of private container operators have been inducted upto 31.5.2011, it is seen that only 5 brake vans have been procured by only one operator (SN/20). This is despite the fact that Railway Brake Vans were supplied to the CTOs subject to a commitment to procure their own brake vans before 31.03.2007(RC 87 of 2006 at SN-3). This violation of the policy should be viewed seriously esp. as it puts undue strain on Railways resources in terms of additional investment. (5) Vide NP/19, the then Adv/R had justified the extant charging procedure stating that brake vans on IR are a scarce rolling stock and on Zonal Railway, trains getting detained for brake vans is quite a common phenomenon. Since sufficient time has passed and CTOs have not shown much inclination of procuring their own brake vans, it is high time we started charging them for using IRs brake van. (6) Thus, it will neither be an operationally sound proposition nor financially viable for Railways to keep lending the Brake Vans to the CTOs that too at a reduced rate as proposed. In view of above considerations and to ensure that the proposed charges do not become lower than the existing charges, following options are available : (a) To charge as per the existing system i.e. hire charges @ Rs. 424/ per brake van per day based on utilisation and haulage charges as per the actual+ 10% i.e. no change or (b) To enable a single charging system in view of practical considerations stated at NP-39, calculations have been done at SN-31 ensuring that the proposed charge is not lower than the existing charge. -43-

Vide work sheet at SN/31, the existing hire charge is 1,54,760/- per brake van per year and haulage charges comes to Rs 8,81,967/- per year. Both charges work out to a total of Rs. 10,36,726/- per year per brake van as against Rs.5,47,500/- proposed by TCR Dte. Prima facie the former appears to be high in view of the cumulative haulage charges. (7) Adv/ Rates had recorded at NP-20 that it is impossible for Zonal Railways to attach and detach a brake van and also keep an accountal of the same which in many cases may lead to dispute. Therefore, the charges should be recovered for the entire year irrespective of the actual usage of the brake van. The quarterly billing system proposed by TCR Dte at NP-40 is agreed to as it will presumably ensure foolproof accountal of charges. (8) To ensure compliance with the MCA, in case, the CTOs do not place an order during the year then a review of the rates and suitable revision may be done so as to encourage the CTOs to procure their own brake vans. Board may kindly take a view based on Para 6 above.

SO/F(C) DDF(C) DF(C) EDF(C) Adv./F MT